who would win knight or samurai? pro tip: the knight by a landslide
>inb4 "knight is too slow because of all the armour"
Samurai armour was also rather heavy the difference isn't that much. Also the European knight is much taller a stronger than a filthy gook from japan.
>inb4 "knights had little to no training compared to samurai" Knights first originated because lords needed to protect their land holdings, in order to protect your shit you need to be have people who were well equipped and good at fighting. Also most factions namely the HRE offered state funded training to young knights.
Alright, lets see if any of you weabs through your blinding weaboo rage of a thousand suns can present an argument that convinces any one that samurai would win
samurai chi strikes go through armor so the knight would just be weighed down by his expensive italian steel
Mason Stewart
The knight would tell the samurai about his mother being a whore and the samurai would commit sudoku.
Evan Kelly
Depends on the tactics. The Japanese did have anti-armour weaponry like the KanabÅ so to say that they didn't have any weapons to crack the knight armour would be invalid. Going to go against the popular opinion; if the Samurai played it smart, he could outmanoeuvre the knight's more lack of peripheral vision. But his margin for error would be very slim.
Noah Wood
Samurai would slice the knight in half with a single swing of his katana. Armor doesn't matter to a sufficiently trained Samurai
Asher Martin
the kanabo was a fucking club faggot. samurai didnt use this shit much anyway, it was a thug weapons
Mason Bailey
fuck off no trolls allowed
Ryder Stewart
The japanese would just use muskets and shoot the minoan greeks
Angel Long
Youre the troll you jew faggot
Joseph Jenkins
katanas were made of tamahagane, which was a kind of iron dust. this, coupled with the smelting techniques of the katana sword smiths made authentically meant katanas were effectively made of iron glass
Hudson Hill
Which made them perfect amplifiers of chi energy which allowed them to cut through even WW2 tanks
Cooper Peterson
the thread says no trolls nigga
Jaxson Scott
Samurai would win pretty comfortably. Any fag could become a knight, whereas Samurais were pretty elite.
Isaiah Taylor
Youre the troll nigga chi has been an established force of the universe going back hundreds of thousands of years
Joshua Morgan
what the fuck are you on about? Japanese starwars?
Jordan Campbell
No they couldnt, to become a knight you either had to descend from a line of elite warriors, or prove yourself to be a highly skilled combatant.
Ethan Cox
Pls don't discriminate against trolls, you need to be more tolerant of others.
Adrian Hall
>state funded training >lords needing people to protect their shit
Hudson Hall
The Samurai literally controlled Japan.
Blake Perez
So did the knights, dipshit. Both Knights and Samurai made up the elite of their societies.
Aiden Ramirez
Jimmy Savile was a knight, any samurai would have wrecked that pedo faggot
Henry Williams
>thread says no trolls >brings up someone born in the 1920's
Joshua Hill
samurai and knights are LITERALLY the same thing just in different cultures.
the only argument valid here is equipment.
Henry Collins
A Knights armor is heavy as shit nigga the fuck you mean. You can't excuse that with any bullshit. Their armor is literally heavy as fuck. If you knock a knight over the little faggots can't get up. Samurai armor is heavy indeed, but nowhere near as heavy as a knight in full plate. The Samurai would win. I'm not a wea boo either I'm being real the Samurai would simply out maneuver the knight because of his fuck heavy armor and limited vision through his visor on his helmet.
Jaxon Carter
But the samurai's sword would break because it's made of the cheapest fucking shit.
Tyler Thomas
>literally the same thing
completely different areas
completely different equipment
completely different culture
Benjamin Lopez
Ye KatAna's are fragile as fuck. But samurai aren't fuckin stupid. They wouldn't just full swing at a nigga in full plate cuz they fucking know their Katana wouldn't do shit. The samurai would use a strategy to defeat the knight , capitalizing on the Knights weakness
Joshua Jackson
Nigger bait
Matthew Adams
AMA KAKERU RYU NO HIRAMEKI >Knight bursts into 40,000 pieces >Nothin' personnel m'lord
Leo Reyes
both literally were formed to protect food/land both had extensive military training both ether lived by an extreme ideology or where mercenaries.
again, literally only difference is equipment. and possible fighting style (that of which matches equipment)
pro-tip kill yourself.
Ryder Hill
Samurai existed for the same fucking thing dude. To proctect a rich man's shit. The one difference is the Samurai ascended to become powerful enough to control the country and have a puppet emporer.
Oliver Moore
Knight armor weighed about 60lbs spread all over the body. If you can't carry that you're a weak bitch. You can sprint in full plate, weak bitch.
Liam Jenkins
You fuck s aren't even debating anymore. Fuck this thread
Josiah Rodriguez
bitch you're thinking of full fucking jousting armour that was about 60kg. that shit was only used for jousts stupid nigger. In 1400s, A samurais armour was about 15 - 25kg and a knights armour was about 30 - 40kg. the weight of the knights armour was also well distributed around the entire body. The weight of samurai armour sat mostly on the shoulders. And a European is alot taller than those gooks from japan.
You could probably sprint for 3 seconds before you run out of breath cuz you're carrying 60lb armor plus his weapon or shield. He can't maintain stamina for long without stopping to rest when he's carrying that much weight
Jacob Anderson
your fucking retarded.
As heavy as it seems the weight was well distributed around the body.
Liam Clark
Doing practices and exercise is a lot different than fighting a samurai nigga
Caleb Phillips
Knight-EASILY .
They just had to many advantages . Probably the biggest advantage is the overall average quality of euro metals at the time .
Most of the piercing weapons made in Japan would shatter against Euro plate armor instead of piercing it .
The belief that plate made it to difficult to move is simply false .
Hunter King
only Europe was constantly at war and by extension so were knights.
Liam Perez
my mom with a fucking fry fan
Gavin White
Ju jitsu was originally made to fight enemies in heavy armor. So if a samurai knew that, he wouldn't necessarily be at a disadvantage.
Cameron Davis
The knight's armor could handle a katana. The samurai, however, would not handle a claymore well.
Aaron Martinez
Viking
Jaxson White
HEMAfag here. One point nobody ever thinks about is how easy it to hit hands, especially with a longsword. They're out front and and more than likely the closest target. If I saw a dude running at me with just some knuckle protection and tiny little tsuba, I'm taking his digits off then finishing the job.
Xavier Long
How is this relevant towards who would win in a fight? Am i being pranked?
Henry Butler
yeah all the samurai has to do is throw down is weapons and go ju jitsu on the knight.
Also are you retarded?
Evan Clark
People like to forget that Samurai existed after Japan had been introduced to guns like flintlock muskets and subsequently gun powder. Japan's feudal era went on loooong after Europe's.
Kayden Gray
The Knight has God on his side. Literally can not lose
Sebastian Young
mah nigga
If the opponent denies blade engagement quite a few schools of thought actually target the hands first and establish control with the point...
Jaxon Rodriguez
please read reply chain.
Asher Fisher
that only proves japans technological inferiority
Sebastian Sanders
...
Isaac Rogers
Kensei beats warden anytime
Jason Clark
please return to 9gag faggot
Jordan Allen
It depends on what time period of knights/samurai
Kayden Hughes
truth right here guys
also better food mixup, and stronger training regimes, most samurais were "poets and artists", while knights were fighting all the fucking time
they also had a better training and martial sense, european tactics were much more effective than asian ones, specially in late medieval era
but the biggest argument is just quality of equipment
Joshua Perez
not to mention a morningstar or a halberd
Camden James
DEUS VULT
Jaxon Butler
Samefag
Jaxson Ward
As much as it surprises you, most european warriors were the top tier of their generation.
Ancient times were dominated by the Persian empire and Greek empire (thanks to Alexander), Persia had an amazing agricultural revolution and Greece had one of the best generals of all times. After that, the Roman empire was just superior to everyone else thanks to the quality of their equipment and the superior military logistics (roads, hospitals, standarized training, good commanding hierarchy...)
During medieval times, the only superior warriors were found in the muslim world (during the early-mid medieval era), thanks to a scientific revolution; and the most predominant european nations, thanks to a very solid agricultural advantage (europe is extremely fertile, and the mediterranean sea was a very good trading point), all this ecconomic advantege lead them to a better quality of equipment and development in general, and a better development of their cities. They didn't have the best demographics, but they didn't need to. They had the best ships, the best armor, the best weapons and the best technique, besides of a strong political system and institutions.
In modern era, the best warriors were spanish tercio and soldiers, followed closely by french and english armies. In fact, if anyone's interested, the battle of Cagay is an example where 20 spanish soldiers defeated 1000 samurais without musquets, only sword to sword combat. This was thanks to "la destreza", a very effective martial art involving armed and non armed combat, developed in Spain and France, a very, very good metallurgic technique and quality of steel, and a refinement of the field tactics, leading to an amazing performance even with few troops. Sieging was changed too, as castles became less effective (during medieval times it was almost impossible to siege a castle, there was once a battle where 3 soldiers in a castle defeated over 500 armed mercenaries during 2 weeks). CONT...
Jonathan Foster
CONT... The rise in physics, engineering, the discovery of gunpowder and innovation in navigation technology is a testimony of the superiority of european nations in that period. While the Otoman empire was also an important factor, during this time they were decadent.
Lastly, during the industrial revolution, the United Kingdom was the dominant empire, having the best trained armies, specially involving marine combat and naval warfare. They also had the strongest economy of the world. A century later, Germany was the most advanced warfare nation, with one of the best trained soldiers of the world, and a scientific advantage over any nation of that time, including the USA
As you can see, europe was the dominant continent, thanks, mostly, to the easy agriculture and the densified population of the central cities. They also had a better institutional support, and better quality of materials
Lucas Martin
Stop using that stale 9fag meme its making you look like a complete newfag. For honor is prob too hard of a game for you anyway so you try to blame 9fag for people posting about it, that is completely retarded.
William Reed
Found the nigger
Isaac Perry
For Honour is not too hard, it is a waste of time
Luis Brown
>fry fan >fan
Jaxon King
DEUS VULT
Noah Rogers
Can't sprint more than 3 seconds carrying 60 lbs plus arms.... lol it's no surprise you're on Sup Forums you fat bastard.
